The Clinical Implications of Tumor Mutational Burden in Osteosarcoma.

osteosarcoma overall survival progression-free survival tumor mutational burden whole-exome sequencing

Journal

Frontiers in oncology
ISSN: 2234-943X
Titre abrégé: Front Oncol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101568867

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2020
Historique:
received: 16 08 2020
accepted: 10 12 2020
entrez: 26 4 2021
pubmed: 27 4 2021
medline: 27 4 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Osteosarcoma (OTS) is aggressive bone malignancy without well-recognized prognosis biomarker. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) has been proved as effective biomarker in predicting clinical outcomes in several cancer types. However, its prognostic value in OTS remains unknown. In this study, we aim to evaluate the implication of TMB in OTS patients. To depict the landscape of somatic mutations in OTS, we performed Whole-Exome Sequencing (WES) on 31 OTS tissue samples and corresponding White Blood Cells (WBCs) as matched control. TMB was calculated as the total number of somatic alterations in coding regions normalized to the per sequenced genomic megabase (~30.4Mb in WES). The prognostic values of TMB were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression models. The median age was 16.0 years at diagnosis, and 54.8% of patients were male. The most common genetic alterations were mainly involved in cell cycle and DNA damage response and repair, including H3F3A, TP53, MYC, and CDKN2A/B. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 775.5 days in TMB-High (defined as third quartile of TMB value, <2.565) versus 351 days in TMB-Low (<2.565). All patients with TMB-High are PFS-Long (>400 days), while 36.4% of all patients with TMB-Low were PFS-Long ( TMB-High can be used as prognostic marker for OTS. Our findings demonstrate that TMB may be helpful in combination with traditionally clinicopathologic risk factors to optimize risk stratification and guide treatment decisions.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Osteosarcoma (OTS) is aggressive bone malignancy without well-recognized prognosis biomarker. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) has been proved as effective biomarker in predicting clinical outcomes in several cancer types. However, its prognostic value in OTS remains unknown. In this study, we aim to evaluate the implication of TMB in OTS patients.
METHODS METHODS
To depict the landscape of somatic mutations in OTS, we performed Whole-Exome Sequencing (WES) on 31 OTS tissue samples and corresponding White Blood Cells (WBCs) as matched control. TMB was calculated as the total number of somatic alterations in coding regions normalized to the per sequenced genomic megabase (~30.4Mb in WES). The prognostic values of TMB were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression models.
RESULTS RESULTS
The median age was 16.0 years at diagnosis, and 54.8% of patients were male. The most common genetic alterations were mainly involved in cell cycle and DNA damage response and repair, including H3F3A, TP53, MYC, and CDKN2A/B. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 775.5 days in TMB-High (defined as third quartile of TMB value, <2.565) versus 351 days in TMB-Low (<2.565). All patients with TMB-High are PFS-Long (>400 days), while 36.4% of all patients with TMB-Low were PFS-Long (
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
TMB-High can be used as prognostic marker for OTS. Our findings demonstrate that TMB may be helpful in combination with traditionally clinicopathologic risk factors to optimize risk stratification and guide treatment decisions.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33898301
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.595527
pmc: PMC8059407
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

595527

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Xie, Yang, Guo, Che, Xu, Sun, Liu, Ren, Liu, Yang, Ji and Tang.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

YFY and DC are the employees of Genetron Health (Beijing) Co. Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

Nat Biotechnol. 2013 Mar;31(3):213-9
pubmed: 23396013
Rheumatol Ther. 2017 Jun;4(1):25-43
pubmed: 27933467
Genome Med. 2017 Apr 19;9(1):34
pubmed: 28420421
Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2012 Jul;51(7):696-706
pubmed: 22454324
Nat Commun. 2017 Jun 23;8:15936
pubmed: 28643781
N Engl J Med. 2018 May 31;378(22):2093-2104
pubmed: 29658845
Clin Cancer Res. 2010 Aug 15;16(16):4256-67
pubmed: 20610556
Int Orthop. 2012 Jan;36(1):131-7
pubmed: 21404025
Clin Cancer Res. 2020 Jun 1;26(11):2565-2572
pubmed: 32019858
Bioinformatics. 2013 Sep 15;29(18):2238-44
pubmed: 23884480
Genome Res. 2012 Aug;22(8):1589-98
pubmed: 22759861
Nature. 2013 Jul 11;499(7457):214-218
pubmed: 23770567
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Sep 20;33(27):3029-35
pubmed: 26304877
Lancet. 2016 May 7;387(10031):1909-20
pubmed: 26952546
Genome Biol. 2011;12(4):R41
pubmed: 21527027
J Biol Chem. 2003 May 30;278(22):20268-77
pubmed: 12654920
Bioinformatics. 2010 Mar 1;26(5):589-95
pubmed: 20080505
Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2014 Jun;16:15-23
pubmed: 24632219
Cell Rep. 2013 Jan 31;3(1):246-59
pubmed: 23318258
Int J Oncol. 2018 Jun;52(6):1972-1980
pubmed: 29620163
Cancer. 2019 Apr 15;125(8):1357-1364
pubmed: 30602061
Genome Biol. 2016 Jun 06;17(1):122
pubmed: 27268795
Bioinformatics. 2014 Aug 1;30(15):2114-20
pubmed: 24695404
N Engl J Med. 2015 Nov 12;373(20):1984
pubmed: 26559592
Nucleic Acids Res. 2012 Nov;40(21):e169
pubmed: 22904074
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 22;9(10):e111045
pubmed: 25337715
Bioinformatics. 2012 Feb 1;28(3):423-5
pubmed: 22155870
Database (Oxford). 2014 May 27;2014:
pubmed: 24865352
J Physiol. 2016 Oct 1;594(19):5441-8
pubmed: 26915533
Nat Genet. 2011 May;43(5):491-8
pubmed: 21478889
J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Nov 02;34:134
pubmed: 26526352
Clin Cancer Res. 2020 Mar 1;26(5):1135-1140
pubmed: 31699828
Oncogene. 2017 Jul 6;36(27):3890-3902
pubmed: 28263981
Oncotarget. 2017 Jul 5;8(46):80416-80428
pubmed: 29113313
Neuron. 2001 Jan;29(1):131-43
pubmed: 11182086
Cancer Discov. 2019 Jan;9(1):46-63
pubmed: 30266815
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019 Jul 1;111(7):695-699
pubmed: 30307503
Bioinformatics. 2012 Jul 15;28(14):1811-7
pubmed: 22581179
PLoS One. 2014 Dec 31;9(12):e115835
pubmed: 25551557
Brief Bioinform. 2013 Mar;14(2):178-92
pubmed: 22517427
Nat Genet. 2019 Feb;51(2):202-206
pubmed: 30643254
Clin Cancer Res. 2019 Oct 15;25(20):6141-6147
pubmed: 31285374

Auteurs

Lu Xie (L)

Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Yufei Yang (Y)

The Division of Bioinformatics, Genetron Health (Beijing) Co. Ltd., Beijing, China.

Wei Guo (W)

Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Dongxue Che (D)

The Division of Bioinformatics, Genetron Health (Beijing) Co. Ltd., Beijing, China.

Jie Xu (J)

Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Xin Sun (X)

Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Kuisheng Liu (K)

Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Tingting Ren (T)

Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Xingyu Liu (X)

Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Yi Yang (Y)

Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Tao Ji (T)

Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Xiaodong Tang (X)

Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Classifications MeSH